Keysight Scary Letter

[bd139]

Yes it is only payable when you sell.  But that assumes you want to keep it. A lot of large test gear purchases on the second hand market are "single job" purchases (same in IT) to solve a specific problem and then it gets tossed. If you throw £1000 on something and someone replaces it with something worth £8000, then you've got a problem.

If you dispose of it, it affects your CGT liability on other investment incomes so for example if you want to liquidate share capital up to your limit you end up getting shafted for higher rate (20%) CGT just by disposing of this in the same financial year.

If you leave it sitting around, you're down your initial £1000 capital in the short term which was fair to expect a quick return on.

The best outcome here is if they buy it back off you for the initial capital and lease you an equivalent piece of kit for a trivial amount of a month for 3 years, then they dispose of it.

This is why the test gear leasing industry is pretty good. The financial (and maintenance) liability is pretty bad on large bits of expensive stuff.

[tggzzz]

Yes it is only payable when you sell.  But that assumes you want to keep it. A lot of large test gear purchases on the second hand market are "single job" purchases (same in IT) to solve a specific problem and then it gets tossed. If you throw £1000 on something and someone replaces it with something worth £8000, then you've got a problem.

If you dispose of it, it affects your CGT liability on other investment incomes so for example if you want to liquidate share capital up to your limit you end up getting shafted for higher rate (20%) CGT just by disposing of this in the same financial year.

If you leave it sitting around, you're down your initial £1000 capital in the short term which was fair to expect a quick return on.

The best outcome here is if they buy it back off you for the initial capital and lease you an equivalent piece of kit for a trivial amount of a month for 3 years, then they dispose of it.

This is why the test gear leasing industry is pretty good. The financial (and maintenance) liability is pretty bad on large bits of expensive stuff.

Understood and accepted.

My ignorant quibble was with the concept that if (in your example) you depreciated the asset to zero and then sold it for £8000, the depreciation was irrelevant w.r.t. CGT. Accountancy tricks like depreciation may be useful for other purposes, of course.

A classic example of the latter was that "Thatcher" noticed that the electricity plant and grid had depreciated to near zero in value (and hence would need replacing), and sold it for that amount. The purchasers looked at the actual condition, saw that it was good for a few more decades with minimal investment, and sniggered amongst themselves at the foolishness of the sale.

[Stray Electron]

Did the letter(s) received reference specific serial number or did they only refer to the units by model number? Just curious.

   I'm about 4 pages behind so someone may have already answered this but I can tell you that at least three of the letters contained an addendum on a 2nd sheet of paper that listed the model and serial number of the item(s) that they wanted back.  This is not an attempt to re-acquire every 34401a out there. It is a number of different models and types of TE and very specific serial numbers. Most of you are out of luck or off the hook, depending on your viewpoint.

[openloop]

but I can tell you that at least three of the letters contained an addendum on a 2nd sheet of paper that listed the model and serial number of the item(s) that they wanted back

No serial numbers in mine. My addendum lists only items, purchase dates and lot numbers. Lot numbers are Outback's inventory thing (as I understand).

E.g. a fresh listing from them:  "G157040 Siemens Simatic bla-bla-bla"  - the number I'm talking about is G157040 here.

[analogRF]

Did the letter(s) received reference specific serial number or did they only refer to the units by model number? Just curious.

   I'm about 4 pages behind so someone may have already answered this but I can tell you that at least three of the letters contained an addendum on a 2nd sheet of paper that listed the model and serial number of the item(s) that they wanted back.  This is not an attempt to re-acquire every 34401a out there. It is a number of different models and types of TE and very specific serial numbers. Most of you are out of luck or off the hook, depending on your viewpoint.

Did the letter(s) received reference specific serial number or did they only refer to the units by model number? Just curious.

   I'm about 4 pages behind so someone may have already answered this but I can tell you that at least three of the letters contained an addendum on a 2nd sheet of paper that listed the model and serial number of the item(s) that they wanted back.  This is not an attempt to re-acquire every 34401a out there. It is a number of different models and types of TE and very specific serial numbers. Most of you are out of luck or off the hook, depending on your viewpoint.

also the letter posted on page 4 does not refer to any specific serial number. Just an order number from outback I guess.

most of the letter only tells the buyer not to resell it and if he did, to tell them who the buyer was by that date (in bold letters). That seems to be their main concern. Maybe trying to stop the item being sold to other countries where they will not have a chance of getting it back.

They don't actually say anything about how they are going to retrieve the item. There is no specific demand for sending it back to anywhere. They only mention this in the first line saying help us to retrieve but it doesn't say how and when or what is the deadline for that.

They do also say the item includes "trade secret information"..."which keysight didn;t authorize for sale"

[gnavigator1007]

but I can tell you that at least three of the letters contained an addendum on a 2nd sheet of paper that listed the model and serial number of the item(s) that they wanted back

Not in mine. My addendum lists only items, purchase dates and lot numbers. Lot numbers are Outback's inventory thing (as I understand).

E.g. a fresh listing from them:  "G157040 Siemens Simatic bla-bla-bla"  - the number I'm talking about is G157040 here.

Pretty much what I was expecting. They did mention they were seeking assistance in tracing and retrieving, not just retrieving. Would seem to indicate that they don't know exactly what they're looking for if some people's purchases are being specified by serial number while others they only mention model number. Kind of shocking if Outback didn't maintain records of the acquisition and sales of specific serial numbers. Gear could be all mixed up from multiple acquisitions of hpak equipment from multiple sources. I don't envy anyone involved in this whole ordeal. Gotta wonder if Outback had sold everything that Keysight is now trying to trace/retrieve or if they had to hand over unsold things still sitting on shelves and are being compensated. I'd hope they're at least getting something for their customer's contact info since that stuff is big money these days 

[Keysight DanielBogdanoff]

It is a specific list of equipment, and it's entirely possible that not all equipment we're trying to get back has a serial number.

[Yansi]

I never heard of some expensive test equipment to be "without serial numbers". Or does it just mean that Keysight (or the other party) does not know the serial numbers (i.e. does no t even know what exact pieces they are looking for)?

[Brumby]

The list may include some items which are not "expensive" that don't have serial numbers - or some of the items may not have had their serial numbers recorded.  That doesn't mean they cannot be recovered.  There is a paper trail and that should be enough to be able to track the items down.  Having serial numbers would be ideal as that would immediately confirm the identity of a specific device, but I wouldn't call it essential.  Then there is the possibility of secondary identification mechanisms - such as a programmed asset number, engraving on the case or some other identifying feature.

Someone is going to have fun.

[bd139]

My ignorant quibble was with the concept that if (in your example) you depreciated the asset to zero and then sold it for £8000, the depreciation was irrelevant w.r.t. CGT. Accountancy tricks like depreciation may be useful for other purposes, of course.

A classic example of the latter was that "Thatcher" noticed that the electricity plant and grid had depreciated to near zero in value (and hence would need replacing), and sold it for that amount. The purchasers looked at the actual condition, saw that it was good for a few more decades with minimal investment, and sniggered amongst themselves at the foolishness of the sale.

You can depreciate it to zero and sell it for £8000 but you better make sure there was no paper trail for it and that £8k gets used on non asset purchases like food, restaurants and incidentals. If you accidentally chuck it on the street after depreciation, then your other personality drags it in and sells it on eBay using a personal account, HMRC will be on you like a seagull on chips.  HMRC have access to eBay for ref.

Depreciation officially only works if it’s a business assets as well. If you bought something for personal interest and it wasn’t used in the line of work then depreciating is not allowed. You pay the gains on the sold value. There are exceptions on some items (cars mainly)

[tggzzz]

My ignorant quibble was with the concept that if (in your example) you depreciated the asset to zero and then sold it for £8000, the depreciation was irrelevant w.r.t. CGT. Accountancy tricks like depreciation may be useful for other purposes, of course.

A classic example of the latter was that "Thatcher" noticed that the electricity plant and grid had depreciated to near zero in value (and hence would need replacing), and sold it for that amount. The purchasers looked at the actual condition, saw that it was good for a few more decades with minimal investment, and sniggered amongst themselves at the foolishness of the sale.

You can depreciate it to zero and sell it for £8000 but you better make sure there was no paper trail for it and that £8k gets used on non asset purchases like food, restaurants and incidentals. If you accidentally chuck it on the street after depreciation, then your other personality drags it in and sells it on eBay using a personal account, HMRC will be on you like a seagull on chips.  HMRC have access to eBay for ref.

All sane, and matches what I would expect.

If you want to be mean to someone, get the police on their backs.
If you want to be thoroughly unpleasant to someone, get HMRC on their backs. HMRC have far more powers of entry than the police, dating back to when revenue men on horseback had to gain entry in the middle of the night.

Depreciation officially only works if it’s a business assets as well. If you bought something for personal interest and it wasn’t used in the line of work then depreciating is not allowed. You pay the gains on the sold value. There are exceptions on some items (cars mainly)

Yup, and your main residence, of course.

[bd139]

Indeed. You just get buggered for inheritance tax instead (this is a battle I have already fought once)

A good reference to HMRC is the dystopian state in the film “Brazil”

[tggzzz]

Indeed. You just get buggered for inheritance tax instead (this is a battle I have already fought once)

A good reference to HMRC is the dystopian state in the film “Brazil”

Trying to prove "gifts" came from "income" not "savings" takes a lot of work. A long, exhaustive submission to HMRC seemed to exhaust them into submission. Fortunately the next time that won't be necessary, since >7 years have elapsed.

Brazil is in my bucket list.

[mikeselectricstuff]

It is a specific list of equipment, and it's entirely possible that not all equipment we're trying to get back has a serial number.

Internal use/prototype equipment perhaps? Firmware that includes debug symbols might come under the "IP" or "Trade secret" category.

[LapTop006]

It is a specific list of equipment, and it's entirely possible that not all equipment we're trying to get back has a serial number.

Internal use/prototype equipment perhaps? Firmware that includes debug symbols might come under the "IP" or "Trade secret" category.

I wonder if they (or a customer trusted with such things, which is more likely a higher end chip / RF vendor than a defence type customer) shut down a lab and didn't control the equipment removal tightly enough.

Or possibly even one of the other shards of the original HP had an old lab that got cleaned out, not knowing that much of the equipment would be prototypes.

[openloop]

There is a simple explanation for missing serial numbers.

Of course Keysight knows them. What they don't know is for items of the same model which eBay customer got which.

For example: Let's say the batch they concerned with had three 34401A DMMs in it. They know I've got one  (), but they don't know which of those 3. Thus they cannot provide me with the serial number.

[Fraser]

Wow this thread keeps growing !

I am thinking Keysight have ‘dropped the ball’ here. You should only send out equipment recovery notices when you have ‘all your ducks in a row’ and are ready to respond to affected persons queries in a meaningful way. The current situation appears most unsatisfactory and almost amateur. This is not the first time I have read of Keysight recovering test equipment and I thought they were pretty prompt at resolving the situation to the ‘customers’ satisfaction.

I have to wonder if Keysight have found themselves in a difficult position where they are effectively acting on behalf of another party who are less well equipped for fast decisions and approvals. This mess is not looking good for Keysight but if it is not of their making, I feel sorry for those having to handle the fallout.

There is no excuse for not replying to communications from an affected customer though.

Fraser

[openloop]

There is no excuse for not replying to communications from an affected customer though.

Outback's Scott Mallery responded right away to my inquest on the subject.

Of course, he wouldn't be able to clear the air about happenings on the Keysight's side.

 

[zitt]

Going to say I got one of these letters via email which was promptly deleted.
It wasn't even for Keysight-branded equipment.

I don't care about what they were trying to accomplish by sending me an email... Email isn't secure... and is inundated with "fraud" attempts.
This was immediately classified as a fraud attempt and deleted.

Now; if they want to send me a court summons... then sure; it's legit. But that needs to be served to me by a court appointed officer.

IF Keysight really is in the right here... they need to be more forthcoming via legitimate means. IE Have Ebay, my local police department, and/or the seller contact me. As it stands now; they can go pound sand.

[Fraser]

I think the back story to this situation is very simple........

All the kit they are trying to recover came from a warehouse in ‘AREA 51’ and now the little green men want it back. Ooooops, best not P off the little green men ..... such could lead to Armageddon 

Sorry, a frivolous moment from me to break the monotony of this thread 

Fraser

[Yansi]

There is a simple explanation for missing serial numbers.

Of course Keysight knows them. What they don't know is for items of the same model which eBay customer got which.

For example: Let's say the batch they concerned with had three 34401A DMMs in it. They know I've got one  (), but they don't know which of those 3. Thus they cannot provide me with the serial number.

Why couldn't they provide it? As simple as writing, if your instrument has ID of ##### then we need, otherwide it is fine, thanks.

[Yansi]

It is a specific list of equipment, and it's entirely possible that not all equipment we're trying to get back has a serial number.

Internal use/prototype equipment perhaps? Firmware that includes debug symbols might come under the "IP" or "Trade secret" category.

Just nothing more than wild speculations.

[zitt]

I contacted "outback" seller on ebay via their messaging system:

What the hell is going on?!?!

I got (and deleted) a letter from ?you? via email that this item is being " seek your assistance with the tracing and retrieval of certain equipment that contains Keysight intellectual property"

I'm laughing because how does a BK instrument have Keysight IP?

I don't know what the hell you're trying to pull; do I need to report you to ebay?
Or is this another fraud attempt?

Admittedly frustrated; and their reply was less than helpful.

Sorry for any inconvenience this is causing you. We are cooperating with Keysight in an attempt to locate some material that was sent to us to sell by one of our suppliers. If you could respond to Keysight, and let them know if you still have the item in question, that would be much appreciated. I understand that it is not a Keysight system, but they are still inquiring about it.

Yeah; sorry... I've already spent more time the I needed to get that response.
I also replied to the paralegal... telling them "Sorry; what?"

Simply put; nothing here makes me think this is legit as *I* had to contact them and nothing has been provided as evidence.
Not my issue. Not my problem.

[artag]

This is timely

https://www.nextgov.com/cybersecurity/2019/02/navy-needs-2-tons-storage-devices-burned-ash/154629/

Can't help laughing that a MISSILE RANGE needs a subcontractor to 'burn devices to ash'.
Why don't they just use them for target practice ?

[Brumby]

I contacted "outback" seller on ebay via their messaging system:

What the hell is going on?!?!

I got (and deleted) a letter from ?you? via email that this item is being " seek your assistance with the tracing and retrieval of certain equipment that contains Keysight intellectual property"

I'm laughing because how does a BK instrument have Keysight IP?

I don't know what the hell you're trying to pull; do I need to report you to ebay?
Or is this another fraud attempt?

Admittedly frustrated; and their reply was less than helpful.

Sorry for any inconvenience this is causing you. We are cooperating with Keysight in an attempt to locate some material that was sent to us to sell by one of our suppliers. If you could respond to Keysight, and let them know if you still have the item in question, that would be much appreciated. I understand that it is not a Keysight system, but they are still inquiring about it.

Yeah; sorry... I've already spent more time the I needed to get that response.
I also replied to the paralegal... telling them "Sorry; what?"

Simply put; nothing here makes me think this is legit as *I* had to contact them and nothing has been provided as evidence.

I understand your scepticism and scam concerns - but having had a clear response to your independent inquiry, I would suggest that you have to consider the recovery campaign as being genuine - unless you think Outback is the one trying to run the scam ... but, then, that cannot be the case, since we have had Daniel Bogdanoff from Keysight tell us here that there is a list and that Keysight people he knows are involved.  Even Outback asked you to contact Keysight.

Ergo, the recovery campaign is real.

As for the IP claim, that may be true or it may be an excuse to open a conversation.  It may also be that under whatever blanket of security is in place, that may be the only story that was sanctioned.  Secret Squirrel stuff can get weird - but that doesn't mean it's not real, but if you want some real evidence, I suggest you contact the coordinator (Keysight) and not simply be dismissive because of the messenger (Outback).

If you are of the opinion that somebody operating under an obvious umbrella of security is going to volunteer information when you haven't even been identified as the owner of an item of interest, then you really don't have a practical understanding of how these things work.  You should never expect to understand anything more than somebody wants the item you have and what the "made whole" aspect will mean to you.

Do not expect to know what went wrong, how big the problem was, the type of equipment involved, who was using it, who stuffed up or how any other owners are dealt with.  You're only going to get minimal information - which might be way less than would make you feel comfortable or give you understanding, but those are unnecessary luxuries.  All you need is to know the campaign is genuine (which has been demonstrated), what you will get out of any compensation and that it is fulfilled.

Not my issue. Not my problem.

Aren't you just a little curious what you might get out of this campaign?